I was most pleased to read T. Lang's article yesterday in which he pointed out the real standard of maintenance carried out by Canal & River Trust, writes Gerald Fellows.

Its standard of maintenance is far short of what is nothing less than the propaganda of the Trust in its desire to to take over the Environmental Agency waterways, stating it will bring 'improved maintenance', which is certainly will not as the maintenance on the Thames, where I moor is fine, thank you very much.

Know only too well

Being able to cruise the Canal & River Trust waterways I know only too well of its standard of maintenance, as I have been 'caught' in its stoppages and struggled with its unbalanced gates, and certainly don't want to see 'ours' reduced to the same standard.

The big problem is that the people who cruise the Thames do so is very large cruisers that are either too wide for the canals or find the locks too much of a problem after those of the river, and therefore do not realise just how bad the standard of maintenance is on the canals.

How can it give 'improved maintenance'?

With as was stated, two major canals closed indefinitely, stoppage after stoppage, thousands of faults and less spent year upon year on winter maintenance, how on earth can Canal & River Trust give 'improved maintenance' to our river?

The users of the Environmental Waterways want to waken up before it is too late, by telling the waterways minister that they are fine and we most certainly do not want the Canal & River Trust 'improved maintenance' under any circumstances.